Schematics & standards
in [Repair]
|
Prev: Sound Technology ST-1700B distortion analyzer measurement pegs meter on low range.
Next: Simple hack to get $1500 to your home.
From: Arfa Daily on 20 Jun 2010 20:34 <PlainBill47(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:525t16dtkek7laq8jlvt7s8o7hqo64g3rm(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 17:06:43 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader > <presence(a)MUNGEpanix.com> wrote: > >>"Dave Plowman (News)" <dave(a)davenoise.co.uk> wrote: >>> In article <hvk3bu$3ju$1(a)reader1.panix.com>, >>> Cydrome Leader <presence(a)MUNGEpanix.com> wrote: >>>> > Regarding resistor values: Who the hell came up with that new way of >>>> > specifying resistance values, like "10R" "or 5K6" or whatever? And >>>> > why >>>> > use this system? I've always used the plain value of the resistance: >>>> > 10, 56, 5.6K, 56K, etc. Simple, obvious, requires no interpretation. >>>> > Is this some kind of Euro thing? >>> >>>> I first saw that on this newsgroup. My question is what idiots came up >>>> with it and why? >>> >>> It's been around on this side of the pond for many a year. It uses fewer >>> characters and no chance of not seeing that little full stop in a poorly >>> copied diagram. Like everything else you need to get used to it, though. >> >>I saw an original diagram for a bass amplifier earlier in this post. >> >>it looked awful and it wasn't a copy. The text annotations looked like >>they came from a 9 dot matrix printer and were small and hard to read. The >>transistors looked lopsided and weird too. That's how it was from the >>start. >> >>I've seriously seen wet-type microfiche printer printouts that look better >>and are easier to follow. >> >>Getting bored and changing how you do stuff every few years doesn't make >>schematics better looking, eaaier to follow or less ambigious by itself. >> >>So, when do you start to write 1.5km as 1km5? >> > That's an excellent suggestion. Your first? > > As an aside, what is it with people who seem to feel they have a > god-given right to dictate the 'right' way to do things? If they had > their way, we'd still be walking everywhere, and seeking shelter in > trees at night. Things change; usually for the better, sometimes not. > Deal with it. > > PlainBill Seconded Arfa
From: David Nebenzahl on 20 Jun 2010 21:33 On 6/20/2010 5:33 PM Arfa Daily spake thus: > "Cydrome Leader" <presence(a)MUNGEpanix.com> wrote in message > news:hvlhh5$8rh$2(a)reader1.panix.com... > >> Arfa Daily <arfa.daily(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: >>> >>> "Cydrome Leader" <presence(a)MUNGEpanix.com> wrote in message >>> news:hvk3bu$3ju$1(a)reader1.panix.com... >>> >>>> David Nebenzahl <nobody(a)but.us.chickens> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Regarding resistor values: Who the hell came up with that new >>>>> way of specifying resistance values, like "10R" "or 5K6" or >>>>> whatever? And why use this system? I've always used the plain >>>>> value of the resistance: 10, 56, 5.6K, 56K, etc. Simple, >>>>> obvious, requires no interpretation. Is this some kind of >>>>> Euro thing? >>>> >>>> I first saw that on this newsgroup. My question is what idiots came up >>>> with it and why? >>> >>> Can you really not understand it ? Or are you being deliberately >>> obtuse ? It has now been explained to the point where a child >>> could understand it. I think it was actually me who you first saw >>> using it here, and I'm pretty sure that we went through it all >>> for your benefit at the time ... >> >> That's funny as writing out values the correct and conventional way >> doesn't need explanation and a child can follow it, and it's been that way >> for decades. >> >> I'm still waiting to see values for money being written out as 44"euro >> symbol"66 with cents after the end instead of 44.66. >> >> periods are too confusing, commas are too confusing! help, we're all >> stupid these days! > > OK then. You started going on about writing voltages in that notation, as > though you couldn't understand that either. Do they not sell zener diodes in > America ? That notation has been used for as long as they've been around. > Like BZY88 C6V8. Have you never seen that, or perhaps you've never > understood what it meant ? Actually, I think you misunderstood *him*. He was saying that if you're going to use that strange system for resistances, why not also use it for voltages (or perhaps any quantity) as well? Instead of 5.6 volts, since you're so all-fired worried about the potential loss of a period (sorry, full stop), then you should write it as 5V6, no? Or something like that. I agree with him. Why the concern about potential loss of decimal-place information regarding resistances, but not for other parameters like voltage? I think this whole system is needless, and therefore needlessly obtuse, no matter that people like you may become accustomed to it. How often does a decimal point actually disappear? Seems as if schematics were drawn the old "bad" way for decades, and I don't remember any big hullabaloo about mistaken resistance values. -- The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring, with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags. - Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)
From: David Nebenzahl on 20 Jun 2010 21:38 On 6/20/2010 3:25 PM PlainBill47(a)yahoo.com spake thus: > As an aside, what is it with people who seem to feel they have a > god-given right to dictate the 'right' way to do things? If they had > their way, we'd still be walking everywhere, and seeking shelter in > trees at night. Things change; usually for the better, sometimes not. > Deal with it. I'll say "point taken", even though you are obviously disagreeing with my (and others') objection to the 8K2 system of ohmic representations. One could just as easily turn that statement of yours around to wonder how the committee that mandated this new system of nomenclature has a right to impose their will on us, as the "god-given right to dictate the 'right' way to do things". I just think it's needless, therefore not an improvement, as opposed to how living in houses is obviously an improvement over seeking shelter in trees at night. (or is it? ... ) -- The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring, with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags. - Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)
From: sparky on 20 Jun 2010 22:09 On Jun 18, 4:18 pm, David Nebenzahl <nob...(a)but.us.chickens> wrote: > Someone else made a comment in another thread here about weird > schematics (like for home appliances). > > Wanted to get a small discussion going on that topic. My take: there are > good and bad standards for schematics. Personally, I can't stand the > ones that use rectangle shapes for resistors, instead of the traditional > zigzag that [insert name of deity here] intended to be used. (And even > here there are lots of variations, like old-fashioned schematics that > took this symbol rather literally and sometimes had ten or twelve zigs > and zags, as if an actual resistor was being constructed on paper). > > Likewise the wire-connecting/jumping convention: here I much prefer the > modern approach, which is to use a dot for a connection and no dot for > no connection, rather than the clumsy "loop" to indicate one wire > jumping over another with no connection. The jumping over loop is much easier to read on a messed up copy than trying to determine if it is a dot or just a smudge. Using 5K6 for markings also makes it earier to read.
From: David Nebenzahl on 20 Jun 2010 22:19
On 6/20/2010 7:09 PM sparky spake thus: > On Jun 18, 4:18 pm, David Nebenzahl <nob...(a)but.us.chickens> wrote: > >> Someone else made a comment in another thread here about weird >> schematics (like for home appliances). >> >> Wanted to get a small discussion going on that topic. My take: there are >> good and bad standards for schematics. Personally, I can't stand the >> ones that use rectangle shapes for resistors, instead of the traditional >> zigzag that [insert name of deity here] intended to be used. (And even >> here there are lots of variations, like old-fashioned schematics that >> took this symbol rather literally and sometimes had ten or twelve zigs >> and zags, as if an actual resistor was being constructed on paper). >> >> Likewise the wire-connecting/jumping convention: here I much prefer the >> modern approach, which is to use a dot for a connection and no dot for >> no connection, rather than the clumsy "loop" to indicate one wire >> jumping over another with no connection. > > The jumping over loop is much easier to read on a messed up copy than > trying to determine if it is a dot or just a smudge. > Using 5K6 for markings also makes it earier to read. Well, then let me ask you the same question I'm asking others here: if that's so, then why don't we use that system (8K2, etc.) for other values like voltages, currents, etc? Aren't they also likely to be hard to read on a "messed-up copy"? Why not be consistent? -- The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring, with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags. - Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com) |